Evidence map›Paper›PMID 10796240›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2000

Continuous positive airway pressure versus theophylline for apnea in preterm infants.

D J Henderson-Smart, P Subramanian, P G Davis

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2000. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 48 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Apnea in the newborn.Indian journal of pediatrics · 2008
    Review
  2. Treatment of apnea of prematurity.Paediatric drugs · 2003
    Review
  3. Apnea in the newborn.Indian journal of pediatrics · 2001
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

D J Henderson-SmartNSW Centre for Perinatal Health Services Research, Queen Elizabeth II Institute for Mothers and Infants, Building DO2, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia, 2006. dhs@mail.usyd.edu.au
P Subramanian
P G Davis
Royal Women's Hospital · AUUniversity of Sydney · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRecurrent apnea is common in preterm infants, particularly at very early gestational ages. These episodes of loss of effective breathing can lead to hypoxemia and bradycardia which may be severe enough to require resuscitation including use of positive pressure ventilation. Theophylline stimulation of breathing and continuous positive airways pressure have been used to prevent apnea and its consequences.

objectivesThe main objective was to determine in preterm infants with recurrent apnea, if treatment with CPAP compared with treatment with theophylline leads to a clinically important reduction in apnea or use of mechanical ventilation, without clinically important side effects. SEARCH STRATEGY: The standard search strategy of the Neonatal Review Group was used. This includes searches of the Oxford Database of Perinatal Trials, Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, MEDLINE, previous reviews including cross references, abstracts, conferences, symposia proceedings, expert informants and journal hand searching mainly in the English language. SELECTION CRITERIA: All trials using random or quasi-random allocation to CPAP or theophylline in preterm infants with clinical recurrent apnea/bradycardia were eligible. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data were extracted using standard methods of the Cochrane Collaboration and its Neonatal Review Group, with separate evaluation of trial quality and data extraction by each author and synthesis of data using relative risk. MAIN

resultsThe use of mask CPAP is associated with a higher treatment failure rate as measured by less than a 50% reduction in apnea or use of the alternative treatment [RR 2.89 (95% CI 1.12,7.47); RD 0.42 (95% CI 0. 11, 0.74)]. For every 2.4 infants (95% CI 1.4, 9.5) treated with mask CPAP rather than theophylline, there results one treatment failure. In the mask CPAP group there is more use of IPPV [RR 3.09 (1.42,6.70; RD 0.58 (95% CI 0.30, 0.86). For every 1.7 infants (95% CI 1.2, 3.3) treated with mask CPAP rather than theophylline, one infant is intubated for IPPV. In the mask CPAP group, there are trends towards more deaths in the first year, and in death or major disability in survivors at follow up, which do not reach significance. There are no differences in rates of necrotizing enterocolitis or major disability in survivors at follow up. REVIEWER'S

conclusionsTheophylline is more effective than mask CPAP for preterm infants with apnea. Since CPAP is no longer administered by mask, the results of this review have limited importance for current clinical practice. Further evaluation of the benefits and harms of CPAP vs theophylline for preterm infants with apnea requires further trials in which CPAP is administered by current methods.

Indexed as

Positive-Pressure RespirationApneaHumansInfant, NewbornInfant, PrematureInfant, Premature, DiseasesTheophyllineVasodilator AgentsTheophyllineVasodilator Agents

Identifiers

PMID10796240
OpenAlexW1930474968

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.